Questions to Catholics and Orthodox: Re: Works/Salvation?

[Magnanimity]

Observational Science is something you can observe for yourself in the here and now without any need of a scientist always. Sure, there are some subjects within Science that are more difficult to grasp, but we are not talking about those. We are talking about basic observational science by our simply looking at something in the here and now and seeing if it is true.

First, it is not at all normative for bystanders to observe experiments of "observational science." Even if you did observe them, being a non-specialist, you would likely not even be able to put together all the relevant facts to make sense of what you observed. But, as I said, you wouldn't observe it--it is highly unusual for experimenters to have an audience. If you and I are not scientists, then making such claims as you do above is effectively meaningless. You can't conduct an "observational science" experiment without being a scientist in a funded scientific environment. So, saying that you "can observe" such things amounts to nothing.

If you aren't a scientist, you wouldn't have the first idea of how to replicate an older experiment, to say nothing of conducting an original one. (See my prior post above about the difficulty of reproducing experiments even if you were a scientist.) Nor would you have any of the necessary equipment, knowledge, etc.

So, the way that you and I come to know anything at all about science is the same way that you and I come to know anything at all about history--we receive such knowledge via testimony.

Again, Historical Science is not trustworthy on the same level as Observational Science because somebody could be making stuff up to suit their own agenda.

By that same logic, everything you might read in "Scientific American," "Science Magazine" or the journal "Nature" could also just be "made up." You yourself didn't observe any experiments that are reported in those scientific magazines. So, how do you know they occurred?

It is utter folly to try to undermine testimony as a reliable source (and grounding) for most of what you know. You'll end up being an agnostic about pretty much everything that you don't directly observe.

For you have no way of proving otherwise if what a person says about history is actually true because you were not there to directly observe such an event yourself. Hence, why Historical Science is not as trustworthy as Observational Science. For how do you know that the history you think you know is correct? Do you have a time machine to confirm such a history?

See above. This type of reasoning leads to agnosticism about all of history (and anything that you don't directly observe) which happens to be the vast majority of all of your beliefs to which you would ascribe significance--you didn't observe them, you received them testimonially.

Romans 10:17 says

1 John 2:3 says

You did not infallibly determine that the above two books belong in your NT. The church argued about it for a while and eventually settled the matter. Then the church told you and everyone else that those books are inspired writings. And you believe that this church which gave you this Bible got it right about the canon of the NT (for some reason...)

 

[Soyeong]

Your belief is that salvation requires belief and works.

But you can hold that without thinking "believing is a work".

Yes, believing is a work, but works without believing won't lead to salvation, so salvation requires belief and those works insofar as the works are what it looks like to believe.

 

[Yarddog]

Hello brothers and sisters,

I am not trying to start a argument, just want to ask.

What is your view regarding salvation, faith and good works?

How does one get saved?

We are saved through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[Soyeong]

I think people can overanalyze.
Over think.

In the end nothing you do can be good enough to earn salvation.Nor is your faith strong enough to say to a mountain rise up and drop in the sea.

Even if someone managed to live in perfect obedience to God's law, then they still would not earn their salvation because salvation is not something that can be earned, so our obedience has never been about trying to be good enough, but about expressing our faith in God to rightly guide us in howe we should live.

But all those who say "faith alone"
Can you imagine yourself at judgement having a theological argument with Him saying "well I didnt bother Lord, because in romans 10:9 you tell me all I need do is confess you are Lord"..so thats all I did.. he will reply "else where I tell you not all who say Lord will be saved!"

I think you would lose the argument......

You could liken all this to a job interview, which asks you to present certain experience and qualifications.

NONE of it is enough to get you the job. NONE of it is enough by itself.
The grace of the interviewer decides that. But if you don't have it, you certainly wont get the job!

When the Lord says "do this", all should "do this" and not analyse whether it is necessary! You are not saved by the works, but woe betide you if you did not make the effort....

Christians should strive to do these things without question. Not ask if they are necessary. Obedience is part of faith.

Part of the problem is meanings of words. What is "faith" in "faith alone?" . Jimmy aitkens book the "salvation controversy" goes a long way to show that disagreement on meanings of words ,has led to much of the arguments . One section of Lutheran reached an accord with the Holy See on "faith alone" accepting that the definition of "faith" involved charity.

Luther's position was that we are saved by faith alone, but that faith is never alone, so we are saved by faith alone in the sense that there are no works that we can do to earn our salvation, but faith is never alone in the sense that the same faith by which we are saved is also expressed as doing good works. Confessing that Jesus is Lord is committing the rest of our lives to obediently submitting to him as Lord. Jesus said that only those who do with will of the Father will enter heaven, so obedience is necessary insofar as it is an expression of faith, but not insofar as it is an attempt to earn our way into heaven.

 

[Guojing]

Yes, believing is a work,

Romans 4:5 disagrees with you

 

[Guojing]

Who says they didn't?

The rightly dividing the word of truth is about properly understanding the meaning of Scripture. It's not something magical.

The chief meaning in Lutheranism here is properly understanding the distinction between Law and Gospel.

The Law being all which God commands.
The Gospel being that which God promises and gives.

There is Gospel in the Old Testament, and there is Law in the New. Otherwise the Prophets would not have spoken of the glorious day of the Messiah and the promises of God for all creation which are found in Him. Neither would our Lord have taught us the commandments which we ought to abide by, nor the Apostles given instruction on how we ought to live.

But the Law can not bring righteousness to sinners who are condemned by it. Which is why it must never be confused as though it were Gospel. Likewise the Gospel is not Law which condemns sinners, but the word by which comes faith, as it is written, "Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ" (Romans 10:17).

To rightly divide the word of truth is to rightly understand what is being said and for what reason it is being said.

-CryptoLutheran

You cannot find that instruction outside of Paul

 

[Guojing]

I think people can overanalyze.
Over think.

In the end nothing you do can be good enough to earn salvation.Nor is your faith strong enough to say to a mountain rise up and drop in the sea.

You rely on grace from the just jduge.

But when Jesus speaks of the sheep and goats in Matt 25 he is clearly saying "do this or else..."
And of the eucharist "eat my flesh....and I will raise you up". He means it!
You have free will to choose whether or not to do them every day. They are not automatic, nor is keeping commandments.

But all those who say "faith alone"
Can you imagine yourself at judgement having a theological argument with Him saying "well I didnt bother Lord, because in romans 10:9 you tell me all I need do is confess you are Lord"..so thats all I did.. he will reply "else where I tell you not all who say Lord will be saved!"

I think you would lose the argument......

You could liken all this to a job interview, which asks you to present certain experience and qualifications.

NONE of it is enough to get you the job. NONE of it is enough by itself.
The grace of the interviewer decides that. But if you don't have it, you certainly wont get the job!

When the Lord says "do this", all should "do this" and not analyse whether it is necessary! You are not saved by the works, but woe betide you if you did not make the effort....

Christians should strive to do these things without question. Not ask if they are necessary. Obedience is part of faith.

Part of the problem is meanings of words. What is "faith" in "faith alone?" . Jimmy aitkens book the "salvation controversy" goes a long way to show that disagreement on meanings of words ,has led to much of the arguments . One section of Lutheran reached an accord with the Holy See on "faith alone" accepting that the definition of "faith" involved charity.

The key is to rightly divide the word of truth.

The gospel of the kingdom requires one to show his faith by his works (James 2:20-24)

The gospel of the grace of God does not (Romans 4:5)

 

[ViaCrucis]

You cannot find that instruction outside of Paul

Paul, writing to his protege Timothy, as part of Paul's pastoral instruction to Timothy.

Also, so what?

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Guojing]

Paul, writing to his protege Timothy, as part of Paul's pastoral instruction to Timothy.

Also, so what?

-CryptoLutheran

There was no need to rightly divide the word of truth before Paul because there was only one truth, Israel's truth.

You were either Israel, or you were not. So all of Israel's truth was for you, before Paul.

 

[Soyeong]

Romans 4:5 disagrees with you

No. Good works can be done for any number of reason, so verses that speak against earning our justification by our works, such as Romans 4:4-5, should not be mistaken as speaking against our justification requiring our works for some other purpose, such as faith. If our obedience to God's law were for God's good, then it would have been about earning our justification as a wage from God, however, God's law was given for our own good, so our obedience is instead about putting our faith in God to rightly guide us, and it is by that same faith that we are justified.

 

[Guojing]

No. Good works can be done for any number of reason, so verses that speak against earning our justification by our works, such as Romans 4:4-5, should not be mistaken as speaking against our justification requiring our works for some other purpose, such as faith. If our obedience to God's law were for God's good, then it would have been about earning our justification as a wage from God, however, God's law was given for our own good, so our obedience is instead about putting our faith in God to rightly guide us, and it is by that same faith that we are justified.

It is distinguishing between believing and work. So you cannot say believing IS a work.

 

[Soyeong]

It is distinguishing between believing and work. So you cannot say believing IS a work.

It is distinguishing between believing and works done to earn a wage, but is not distinguishing between believing and works done out of faith. In other words, all faith is expressed through our works, but not all works are expressions of faith, such as those works done to earn a wage.

 

[Guojing]

It is distinguishing between believing and works done to earn a wage, but is not distinguishing between believing and works done out of faith. In other words, all faith is expressed through our works, but not all works are expressions of faith, such as those works done to earn a wage.

Oh, you are another who distinguishes between works of law and works of faith?

Alright then, thanks for clarifying

 

[Soyeong]

Oh, you are another who distinguishes between works of law and works of faith?

Alright then, thanks for clarifying

In Romans 3:27-31, Paul contrasted a law that is of works with a law that is of faith, so works of the law are of works, while he said in verse 31 that our faith upholds the Mosaic Law, so it is works of faith. Likewise, in Matthew 23:23, Jesus said that faith is one of the weightier matters of the Mosaic Law.

 

[Guojing]

In Romans 3:27-31, Paul contrasted a law that is of works with a law that is of faith, so works of the law are of works, while he said in verse 31 that our faith upholds the Mosaic Law, so it is works of faith. Likewise, in Matthew 23:23, Jesus said that faith is one of the weightier matters of the Mosaic Law.

Paul is not saying there are works of law and works of faith there. You are trying to read that in.

 

[Soyeong]

Paul is not saying there are works of law and works of faith there. You are trying to read that in.

Romans 3:27 Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? By a law of works? No, but by the law of faith.

This verse is clearly contrasting a law of works with a law of faith, so I don't see how you can say that I am reading that into it.

 

[Guojing]

Romans 3:27 Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? By a law of works? No, but by the law of faith.

This verse is clearly contrasting a law of works with a law of faith, so I don't see how you can say that I am reading that into it.

Law of faith is a totally different term from works of faith. The latter is your invention.

 

[Danthemailman]

Oh, you are another who distinguishes between works of law and works of faith?

Alright then, thanks for clarifying

I was once in a discussion with a Roman Catholic and I clarified to him that we are saved through faith and not by works. The Roman Catholic agreed with me and stated that the Roman Catholic church does not teach salvation by works. Afterward, he contradicted himself by saying that we are saved through faith + "these" works (works of faith) and just not "those" works (works of the law).

That Roman Catholic also made this statement below:

We ARE saved by faith - as long as you properly define "Faith". Faith is NOT simply "believing". Faith INCLUDES: Being baptized, eating His body and drinking His blood/partaking the Lord's Supper during Mass, works of mercy and charity, obeying his commandments, doing the will of the Father etc..

His argument about the Roman Catholic church not teaching salvation by works yet afterward stating that we are saved by "works of faith" and just not "works of the law" and about faith being "defined as" and INCLUDES these works above is just sugar coated double talk and equates to salvation through faith (his version of faith) + works.

 

[fhansen]

I was once in a discussion with a Roman Catholic and I clarified to him that we are saved through faith and not by works. The Roman Catholic agreed with me and stated that the Roman Catholic church does not teach salvation by works. Afterward, he contradicted himself by saying that we are saved through faith + "these" works (works of faith) and just not "those" works (works of the law).

That Roman Catholic also made this statement below:

We ARE saved by faith - as long as you properly define "Faith". Faith is NOT simply "believing". Faith INCLUDES: Being baptized, eating His body and drinking His blood/partaking the Lord's Supper during Mass, works of mercy and charity, obeying his commandments, doing the will of the Father etc..

His argument about the Roman Catholic church not teaching salvation by works yet afterward stating that we are saved by "works of faith" and just not "works of the law" and about faith being "defined as" and INCLUDES these works above is just sugar coated double talk and equates to salvation through faith (his version of faith) + works.

The real question is, what makes us righteous enough in the eyes of God to enter heaven? Can a person with faith alone, but no works including overcoming sin (fulfilling the law), enter heaven? Are they "salvageable"? Do we need to do anything? Do we need to be-can we be- personally righteous in any manner? And Scripture tells us yes, in many places, Paul's writings included.

And yet there's no contradiction here because as Paul was opposing works of the law he was opposing legalism, the idea that I can be righteous on my own apart from God by a mere exhibition or external show of righteousness. That concept is what Paul was battling. And no such righteousness really even exists and so no such works have any meaning: they do not justify us-because pretend righteousness does not make us just. So in Matt 5 Jesus raises the standard higher. We must be clean on the inside first of all-and that's a work of God's, alone, coming about only by our being with God, under grace where we now live by the Spirit. And that obligation to be righteous remains with the New Covenant-and it's not guaranteed that the obligation will be met because we must play our little role in its fulfillment. For example:
"Therefore, brothers and sisters, we have an obligation—but it is not to the flesh, to live according to it. For if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live." Rom 8:12-13

"Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean." Matt 23:26

And it's not really correct to say that works of faith make us righteous in God's eyes: love is what makes man just or righteous in His eyes which is why the greatest commandments are what they are. And love works, by its nature, for the good of others. Faith is meant to establish us in this righteousness, this love, because faith means we're now operating in unison with God, the very source of love/righteousness, in living our lives. It establishes us in Him, Goodness and Righteousness itself, 'apart from whom we can do nothing'. So everything born of faith is good. And the primary goodness to result is love:
"The only thing that counts is faith working through love." Gal 5:6

 

[1watchman]

I agree with that brother.

How do believe that one gets salvation?

That sounds like one who has never read John 3; John 14; Acts 4:12; Romans 8; etc. In John 14:6 Jesus is saying He is "---the way;" (also note John 10:9 about 'the door'). Are you willing to "..enter in" by a personal faith in Jesus Christ? Are you seeking answers in the four Gospels about salvation or are you just reasoning in your mind? The salvation of God is in POSSESSION of Jesus Christ, not just in a belief ---but a relationship. I often advise seekers to receive the Lord Jesus by talking to Him and making Him your Savior, Lord, and best Friend; and be walking and talking with Him all day. God will THEN seal that one as a "child of God" forever by the indwelling Holy Spirit. It is easy, but REQUIRES one to be honest and earnest. Keep looking up ---not just around, dear friend!